Why Xinjiang is central to US cold war on China
As China seizes the tech innovation initiative, US has mobilized a
rights-related diplomatic weapon to fight back By VIJAY PRASHAD And JIE XIONG
APRIL 17, 2021
On March 22, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken authorized
sanctions against Wang Junzheng, the secretary of the Communist Party of China’s
Committee of the Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps (XPCC), and Chen
Mingguo, director of the Xinjiang Public Security Bureau (XPSB). These
sanctions, Blinken said, were because Wang and Chen are accused of being party
to “genocide and crimes against humanity in Xinjiang.”
The US Treasury
Department followed suit with its own sanctions. Wang and Mingguo responded by
condemning these sanctions, which were not only imposed by the US but also by
Canada, the UK and the European Union. Wang called the sanctions “a gross
slander,” while Chen said he was “very proud of being sanctioned by these
countries.”
In October 2011, then-US secretary of state Hillary Clinton
announced a “pivot to Asia,” with China at the center of the new alignment.
Clinton said many times – including in Hawaii in November 2011 – that the
administration of former president Barack Obama wanted to develop “a positive
and cooperative relationship with China,” the US military buildup along Asia’s
coastline told a different story. The 2010 US Quadrennial Defense Review noted
“China’s growing presence and influence in regional and global economic and
security affairs” and called it “one of the most consequential aspects of the
evolving strategic landscape.”
In 2016, US Navy Admiral Harry Harris, head of
the Pacific Command, said the United States was ready to “confront China,” a
statement given strength by the US military buildup around China. The
administrations of Donald Trump and Joe Biden have largely followed the “pivot
to Asia” policy, with a special emphasis on China. The United States has been
struggling to keep up with China’s rapid scientific and technological
advancements and has few intellectual or industrial tools in place to compete.
This is the reason it has tried to stall China’s advances using diplomatic and
political power, and through information warfare; these elements comprise what
is called a “hybrid war.”
Information warfare Prior to a March 2019 event
co-hosted by the US Mission to International Organizations in Geneva, most
people the US were largely unaware of the existence of the Xinjiang region in
China, let alone of the 13 million Uighur people (one of China’s 55 recognized
ethnic minorities). Given that the Uighurs are the demographic majority in this
westernmost province of China, the official name of the administrative unit is
the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region. The March 2019 event featured Adrian
Zenz, a German researcher and a senior fellow in China studies at the Victims of
Communism Memorial Foundation, an organization founded in 1993 by the US
government to promote anti-communist views.
In April 2020, this foundation –
against all evidence – accused China of being responsible for the global deaths
resulting from the spread of Covid-19. Zenz is also associated with the
conservative defense-policy think-tank the Jamestown Foundation, founded by
William Geimer, who was close to the US administration of the late Ronald
Reagan. Zenz and Ethan Gutmann, another researcher at the Victims of Communism
Memorial Foundation, continued to repeat their conclusions regarding “genocide”
in Xinjiang to the US Congress and in a range of mainstream publications. Hosted
by the British Broadcasting Corporation and Democracy Now, Zenz provided what
appeared to be documentation of atrocities meted out by the “Chinese
authorities” against the Uighur population. Zenz and Gutmann would be joined by
organizations funded by Western governments but which – as non-governmental
organizations – pose as independent research and advocacy groups (such as the
Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect and the Uighur Human Rights
Project; the former is funded by Western governments and the latter by the US
government’s National Endowment for Democracy).
In June last year, then-US
secretary of state Mike Pompeo attacked the Chinese government, basing his
statements on Xinjiang on the “German researcher Adrian Zenz’s shocking
revelations.” Zenz provides a set of scientifically dubious and politically
charged papers, which are then used as fact by the US government in its
information war against China. Anyone raising questions about Zenz’ claims is,
meanwhile, marginalized as a conspiracy theorist. Diplomatic and economic
warfare The US government’s information warfare against China has produced the
“fact” that there is genocide in Xinjiang. Once this has been established, it
helps develop diplomatic and economic warfare.
On March 22 this year, the same
day as the US sanctions, the Council of the European Union unilaterally imposed
asset freezes and travel bans on four Chinese government officials, including
Wang Junzheng and Chen Mingguo as well as Wang Mingshan and Zhu Hailun. The
United Kingdom and Canada also joined in this venture that day. It appeared to
be a coordinated attempt to portray China as a country violating human rights.
This assault came soon after China had achieved a major human-rights goal,
lifting 850 million people from absolute poverty. The US government and its
media outlets tried to challenge this remarkable achievement. Trump had pushed a
trade war with China as soon as he came into office in January 2017; his policy
framework remains in place under Biden.
To draw together the trade war and the
Xinjiang information war, in mid-December 2020, Zenz and the Newlines Institute
for Strategy and Policy (formerly the Center for Global Policy) released an
intelligence brief on “coercive labor in Xinjiang.” The claims in this briefing
– building on a 2019 Wall Street Journal article on supply chains and Xinjiang –
created a media firestorm in the West, amplified by Reuters and then picked up
by many widely read outlets. It led to the US government ban on Xinjiang cotton.
A third of the world’s textiles and clothing come from China, with the country
accounting for US$120 billion worth of exports of these products per year and
$300 billion in exports of all merchandise annually. According to China’s
National Bureau of Statistics, 87% of China’s total cotton output comes from
Xinjiang. Most of the high-quality Xinjiang cotton – and the textiles produced
from it within China – go to Western apparel companies, such as H&M and Zara. In
2009, many of these companies created the Better Cotton Initiative (BCI), which
has – until last year – been upbeat about developments in Xinjiang (including
co-ops of small farmers in Xinjiang).
As recently as March 26 this year, the BCI
made a clear statement: “Since 2012, the Xinjiang project site has performed
second-party credibility audits and third-party verifications over the years,
and has never found a single case related to incidents of forced labor.” Despite
the BCI’s recent confident statement and its optimism, things are rapidly
changing for Xinjiang cotton farmers as the BCI appears to get on board with the
United States’ intensifying hybrid war on China. The BCI closed down its page on
its work in China, accused China of “forced labor” and other human-rights
violations, and set up a Task Force on Forced Labor and Decent Work. Officials
of Xinjiang’s government contested these claims, saying that much of the field
labor for cotton in Xinjiang has already been replaced by machines (many of them
imported from the US firm John Deere). A recent book edited by Hua Wang and
Hafeezullah Memon, Cotton Science and Processing Technology, confirms this
point, as do a range of media reports from before 2019. But facts like these
don’t seem to stand a chance in the overwhelming information war. Xinjiang – two
and a half times the size of France – is now at the epicenter of a cold war not
of its own making.
This article was produced by Globetrotter, which provided it
to Asia Times.
0 comments:
Post a Comment